Why aren't we talking about "Draw Muhammad Day?" May 20th

@failures art,

So, what does your friend have to say about this campaign?

@InfraBlue,

He did not comment specifically to the campaign, so I cannot say how his statement to me would be the same or different in regards to the campaign. Being that he read my blog post, he is certainly aware of the campaign. If he wanted to say something about it separate from what he addressed with me, he choose not to.

I don't want to put words in his mouth.

A
R
T

0 Replies

So are the people posting pictures of Mohammed including their names and
addresses?

2 Replies

@failures art,

failures art wrote:

One of my Muslim roommates from college replied to my post on facebook. Here is what he had to say to me.

That was nice of you to share his thoughts. I confess some parts of the religion confuse me, but I did know (mostly) the part he shared about the idolatry worship.

0 Replies

@BorisKitten,

Quote:

And if "Patience is from Allah," does this not indicate, rationally, that Muslims who threaten to kill cartoonists lack the very patience their prophet has requested, even demanded?

No, it reflects people who are in a different culture, a different mindset. In the overall scheme of things, it wasn't all that long ago that christians were doingthe same thing.

Now what of all the Nicaraguan innocents who were slaughtered with the help of the Reagan government? Why aren't we talking about justice for those Nicaraguans?

1 Reply

@George,

George wrote:

So are the people posting pictures of Mohammed including their names and
addresses?

By posting on Facebook, yes. I don't, however, think that it's necessary for everyone to make themselves equally accessible for their contributions to matter. More is always better, but the point is merely to expand the size of the potential target; not to replace it. I would imagine the most beligerent of the protesters would be most likely to be targetted, but I wouldn't bet my family's lives on it if I had one.

0 Replies

@OCCOM BILL,

Quote:

granted by the creator according to our founding fathers,

And you believe this tripe, Bill?

2 Replies

My home computer has just been hacked. As of today, Norton Antivirus (as you can see from the screen print below) has been disabled.
I did not do this. I never do this.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3397/4617019512_ae660d7b8d_b.jpg

Just as of today, Norton updates are "Not Available" on my home computer.

Clearly, I found a way around this, er, problem.

If other folks could help me with this, I have several screen-prints to send to Robert Gentel, or others in-the-know,
before someone finds a better hack which I can't avoid.
Thank you, friends.

PS - If you don't hear from me for a bit: I'm fine. A better hack has
occurred.

0 Replies

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
granted by the creator according to our founding fathers,
And you believe this tripe, Bill?

Our founding fathers’ religious beliefs, or lack thereof for that matter, are no concern of mine. The point is, and yes I believe that certain Rights are, or should be, inherent, inalienable... as in not for government to give nor take away. Do you disagree?

Is the freedom to incessantly run your mouth almost exclusively idiotically a natural right? Or is it a privilege afforded you by your government? And do you think fanatics should dictate to you what is off limits to say, see or hear? Does it matter who the fanatics are? I mean, is it only Muslim fanatics who should get away with de facto censorship? Or should any old group of assholes with an axe to grind be able to Death-Threat speech they don't like out of existence?

2 Replies

@George,

George wrote:

So are the people posting pictures of Mohammed including their names and
addresses?

Yes, I did. I've made no effort to hide my identity on this. I think others should do the same. This form of protest is more like a large artistic petition. Petitions need signatures.

A
R
T

0 Replies

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
And if "Patience is from Allah," does this not indicate, rationally, that Muslims who threaten to kill cartoonists lack the very patience their prophet has requested, even demanded?

No, it reflects people who are in a different culture, a different mindset. In the overall scheme of things, it wasn't all that long ago that christians were doingthe same thing.

Now what of all the Nicaraguan innocents who were slaughtered with the help of the Reagan government? Why aren't we talking about justice for those Nicaraguans?

Because they're not threatening to kill us over cartoons?

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

Quote:

Our founding fathers’ religious beliefs, or lack thereof for that matter, are no concern of mine. The point is, and yes I believe that certain Rights are, or should be, inherent, inalienable... as in not for government to give nor take away. Do you disagree?URL: http://able2know.org/reply/post-3991450

If their religious beliefs are of no concern, and you recognize that they weren't of one mind, why would you post such a silly idea, that some creator established these rights.

Quote:

These are fundamental, inalienable constitutional rights, granted by the creator according to our founding fathers, and the right to these freedoms transends any thoughts of niceties.

Quote:

Is the freedom to incessantly run your mouth almost exclusively idiotically a natural right? Or is it a privilege afforded you by your government? And do you think fanatics should dictate to you what is off limits to say, see or hear? Does it matter who the fanatics are? I mean, is it only Muslim fanatics who should get away with de facto censorship? Or should any old group of assholes with an axe to grind be able to Death-Threat speech they don't like out of existence?

Why didn't you spend more time answering the very simple question I asked, instead of running off on these tangents?

No, these are not natural rights. This thread has illustrated that very clearly. But beyond that, the notion that these were god-given is a dangerous and, pardon me for being so blunt, a very stupid notion to be spreading about.

2 Replies

@OCCOM BILL,

Quote:

Or should any old group of assholes with an axe to grind be able to Death-Threat speech they don't like out of existence?

confused as allways I see....

Those issuing death threats are responsible for the death threats, those conforming to the will of those issuing death threats are responsible for conforming.

slam those issuing death threats for death threats all you want, that is fair. But you can not slam them for limiting free speech. Much more reasonable would be to jump on the cowards who let the ass-holes win.

1 Reply

Please allow me to state, before my hackers become smarter than I am, that the Koran does NOT, in fact, prohibit anyone from depicting Muhammad.

Later commentary-texts suggest that MUSLIMS not depict Muhammad.

I am not a Muslim.

0 Replies

@BorisKitten,

Quote:

Because they're not threatening to kill us over cartoons?

No, the Nicaraguans were doing absolutely nothing to the USA or its citizens. For that, many were tortured, raped, murdered.

They only wanted to raise their families, have homes, be secure, love and be loved. What the USA did to them makes this little tempest pale into nothingness; it seems like nothing more than the whining of some very spoiled children.

0 Replies

@squinney,

Quote:

I don't get the whole "being offended" thing because I view taking offense as aproblem for the one offended, not the supposd offender.

Does that apply to someone farting in an elevator ?

Quote:

I view 'nigger' and 'spic' in the same way.

There was a time when everyone called blacks a nigger. The word became synonymous with putting blacks down. It can be very difficult to live in a world where you are put down and you (and your beliefs) are ridiculed and insulted.

Quote:

If I take offense, it is because some core truth exists in ME

If I take offense, it is because someone has damaged what is rightfully mine.

To me, it seems people dont have freedom of speech if they are manipulated like puppets. Lets all draw Muhammad ....so much for independant thought and its expression.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Or should any old group of assholes with an axe to grind be able to Death-Threat speech they don't like out of existence?

confused as allways I see....

Those issuing death threats are responsible for the death threats, those conforming to the will of those issuing death threats are responsible for conforming.

slam those issuing death threats for death threats all you want, that is fair. But you can not slam them for limiting free speech. Much more reasonable would be to jump on the cowards who let the ass-holes win.

Right. Because self-preservation matters not at all, says the pathetic coward who talks tough on the internet from behind a fake name and phony avatar. I suppose you blame the Jews for getting on the train while holding the Nazi's harmless too. You and the paper soldier would do well to refrain from accusing others of cowardice while cowering in anonymity. Just makes you look that much more ridiculous than your idiotic posts alone otherwise would.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
Our founding fathers’ religious beliefs, or lack thereof for that matter, are no concern of mine. The point is, and yes I believe that certain Rights are, or should be, inherent, inalienable... as in not for government to give nor take away. Do you disagree?URL: http://able2know.org/reply/post-3991450

If their religious beliefs are of no concern, and you recognize that they weren't of one mind, why would you post such a silly idea, that some creator established these rights.

Quote:
These are fundamental, inalienable constitutional rights, granted by the creator according to our founding fathers, and the right to these freedoms transends any thoughts of niceties.

Quote:
Is the freedom to incessantly run your mouth almost exclusively idiotically a natural right? Or is it a privilege afforded you by your government? And do you think fanatics should dictate to you what is off limits to say, see or hear? Does it matter who the fanatics are? I mean, is it only Muslim fanatics who should get away with de facto censorship? Or should any old group of assholes with an axe to grind be able to Death-Threat speech they don't like out of existence?

Why didn't you spend more time answering the very simple question I asked, instead of running off on these tangents?

You are suggesting I drifted (while running your mouth about Nicaragua)? Choosing to stay on point when a troll shows up is not a tangent.

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

Quote:

Right. Because self-preservation matters not at all

naming one reason for limiting speech has nothing to do with who is responsible for the loss of speech. If you remain quiet that is on you, no matter what your reasons. Death threats are almost never carried out, of you are going to let a death threat bully you then what the whole exercise shows is your character.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

Quote:
I don't get the whole "being offended" thing because I view taking offense as aproblem for the one offended, not the supposd offender.
Does that apply to someone farting in an elevator ?

](snicker) Yeah. I might think "Dang, I hope they make it to the bathroom in time..." but it is a natural bodily function that can't always be avoided. Why bother taking offense to that? How is that an affront to my dignity?

Quote:
I view 'nigger' and 'spic' in the same way

There was a time when everyone called blacks a nigger. The word became synonymous with putting blacks down. It can be very difficult to live in a world where you are put down and you (and your beliefs) are ridiculed and insulted.

No kidding. It can be difficult. But, were I African American and someone called me nigger, I'd recognize that it is their problem, and not anything actually about me. One's best bet is to present yourself in such a way as to have no one believe them when they hear the bigot/racist/hater because they know you to be otherwise.

Quote:
If I take offense, it is because some core truth exists in ME
If I take offense, it is because someone has damaged what is rightfully mine.

Well, that wouldn't offend me. Might make me angry, or sad, but not offended. I know hurt feelings may be part of being offended, but to me being offended implies some sort of indignation, which in turn relates to pride. So, how can someone damaging a thing that belongs to me hurt my pride? Maybe the narrower definition of "offended" is where I wasn't clear earlier?

To me, it seems people dont have freedom of speech if they are manipulated like puppets. Lets all draw Muhammad ....so much for independant thought and its expression.

1 Reply

Why aren't we talking about "Draw Muhammad Day?" May 20th

Quick Links

My Account

able2know